TMI Blog2019 (10) TMI 1373X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not sustainable, hence ordered to be deleted. However, in case, Revenue finds that the assessee has not deposited the taxes along with interest due well within time then Revenue has liberty to file the application as per law to seek necessary relief. Consequently, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. - ITA No.4443/Del./2016 - - - Dated:- 7-10-2019 - SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the ASSESSEE : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate, Shri Somil Aggarwal, Advocate For the REVENUE : Dr. Vijay Kumar Chadha, Senior DR ORDER PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : Appellant, Shri Jagjit Singh (hereinafter referred to as the assessee ) by filing the present appeal sought to set ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any view of the matter and in any case, imposition of penalty u/s 271AAA and confirmed by Ld. CIT(A) is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. Briefly stated the facts necessary for adjudication of the issues at hand are : On the basis of assessment framed under section 143 (3) read with section 153 (1)(b) of the Act at an income of ₹ 5,06,84,450/-, penalty proceedings were initiated u/s 271AAA of the Act on the ground that the assessee has made voluntary surrender of ₹ 3,91,44,424/- on account of jewellery, cash found from the assessee s premises and unaccounted investment in the property. Assessing Officer (AO) proceeded to levy the penalty of ₹ 39,14,442/- i.e. 10% of the undisclosed/surr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tention of the assessee that the manner in which the undisclosed income was derived has been duly substantiated. It is also not in dispute that on quantum, the Revenue has accepted the order passed by the ld. CIT (A) thus attained finality. 7. In the backdrop of the aforementioned facts and circumstances of the case, now the sole question arises for determination in this case is as to whether the assessee has complied with second condition to get immunity u/s 271AAA(2)(i) that he has paid tax together with interest, if any, within due date in respect of the undisclosed income? 8. Ld. CIT (A) has confirmed the penalty on the premise that the assessee has paid taxes beyond the due date of return amounting to ₹ 1,00,19,297/- a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2010. Sd/- (Ajay Goyal) Director (ITA. II) 11. When we examine para 3 of the assessment order AO has categorically recorded the fact that the assessee has filed return of income on 15.10.2010 declaring income of ₹ 5,06,84,450/- which was processed on 20.04.2011 and has accepted the contention of the assessee that the assessee has paid taxes and interest thereon in due date before filing of return on 15.10.2010 and has proceeded to levy the penalty on the sole ground that the assessee has failed to specify and substantiate the manner in which the undisclosed income has been earned. 12. When we examine return of income along with computation of income filed by the assessee for the year under assessment, available at page ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is shown at nil. Similarly, in Form 26AS annexed with the Income-tax return of the assessee, detail of tax paid has been duly shown, which has not been controverted by the ld. Senior DR. 6. Perusal of the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT (A) shows that somehow ld. CIT (A) has omitted to account for the deposit of ₹ 27,70,110/- made by the assessee in the bank being tax paid on the declared income and reached the conclusion to confirm the penalty levied by the AO, whereas computation of income and Form 26AS duly shows that the said amount has been paid in the bank on 04.01.2010 which is well within time. 15. The contention raised by the ld. DR for the Revenue that the payment of taxes and interest alleged to have been paid b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
